Chapter Nine

The Academic Debate


ITHIN the realm of academia, the debate regarding the legends of Lemuria and Atlantis should be clear: there is no proof; therefore, it never existed. The advancements made within scientific academia however tell a different story. Archaeological discoveries allude to a new historical variation that many are at a loss to explain. For example, if archaeologists were investigating a site and discovered something exceeding the historical records, in other words was ―too ridiculously old,‖ it would be put aside and forgotten. But what if collectively, there is enough of the same anomalous data that could shed light onto a different perspective? It would be difficult to say for sure what becomes of these pieces of evidence that do not make it into the records. Artifacts often end up uncatalogued in the basement of a university‘s collection, lost within piles of boxes. Many believe that archaeological research in a specific location takes place over a long period of time so that nothing can be missed. This true in that archaeologists have all the

The Academic Debate 169

time needed to conduct proper investigations given that the investigations are taken place in a national park or other restricted areas of land. Many times, archaeologists working in the field work within various Cultural Resource Management (or CRM) groups and do not have the luxury of time. The purpose of CRM groups is to quickly research and investigate a given location for a client, in order to collect anything of historical importance. For instance, a private company is planning to build a set of structures within a given set of acres of land. Upon digging, some workers uncover skeletal remains alongside pottery shards. The private company then puts a halt on all further work in the area, resulting in a great loss of money for the company, and hires a CRM group to investigate. A team of archaeologists are called in to find anything important, and are limited to a strict deadline, usually ranging from two to four weeks. In many instances, the archaeologists are working in front of a bulldozer if the deadlines are even more limited. If skeletal remains are found, another set of procedures must be adhered to because of the complexity of NAGPRA (Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act) laws. The team usually picks out a few locations to dig and investigate, while avoiding the rest. Because of time constraints, they have to limit their digs to a few locations to see if anything is found. After the investigation is complete, the bulldozers come in and destroy what remains. This is not limited to private companies, but governmental agencies also use similar tactics. If the state is building or expanding on a freeway, again the same measures are taken and anything that is not retrieved is destroyed. When the archaeologists conduct their investigations they usually work with an academic frame of mind. If they know a group of indigenous lived within a given area during a certain time period, they correspondingly dig within those layers of the soil. I have heard several stories of archaeologists finding more than they were looking for. I recall a private

The Academic Debate 170

discussion with a university archaeology professor, telling me a story from his past. He had been working within a CRM team located in Nevada where they were called in to investigate an area for possible Native American remains. The team would dig until they hit a rock-hard layer of volcanic ash. According to historical records, they knew that the volcano had erupted before Native Americans inhabited the land. As a result, they understood that nothing could exist prior to the time of the ancient volcanic eruption. As their deadline was coming to an end, one of the archaeologists decided to randomly start breaking through the hard layers of volcanic rock. It was an arduous task, but eventually he broke through the layer. What he found amazed all the other archaeologists working nearby: he had discovered the ruins of an ancient dwelling or civilization where none was suppose to exist. By that time, their deadline was up, and everything was covered and abandoned. DNA & Skeletal Analysis Some of the most amazing discoveries are made by ordinary people when least expected. Some of these findings completely change the way we look at human history as we know it. On July 28th, 1996, two men attempted to get a closer look at a boat race on the Columbia River in Kennewick, Washington. They noticed something unusual protruding from the eroded river bank and quickly notified the authorities. At first glance, archaeologist James Chatters assumed it was a European settler who had died during the 1800‘s. Radiocarbon tests determined that the body was over nine thousand years old.1 The man had a projectile point embedded in his hip, several months prior to his death. He had apparently died in his mid 40‘s from an infection. What was very odd about the individual was that he did not resemble modern day Native Americans; in fact, the skeletal remains looked like that of a

The Academic Debate 171

―Caucasian.‖ A media frenzy ensued, referring to the skeletal remains as Kennewick Man. Various Native American tribes, including the Nez, Perce, and Yakama tribes claimed relation and ownership to the skeletal remains, abiding to NAGPRA law. Federal hearings took place to determine which of the five tribes claiming relations should be granted the remains. The federal judge stated that further investigations over the remains should take place before scientists could accurately determine the tribal descendants. The case of Kennewick Man marks the first time that these ―Caucasian‖ remains were fully publicized; however, it was not the first or nor last time ancient ―Caucasian‖ remains have been found in the United States. In 1959, archaeologists uncovered skeletal remains of a ―Caucasian‖ man dating back over 10,000 BCE on Santa Rosa Island, off the coast of California. There were clear indications of stone tools in the area dating back between 12,500 and 29,700 BP (Before Present). 2 Another case is that of Spirit Cave mummy found in Nevada, in 1940, dating back 9,415 +/-25 years BP.3 Similar to Kennewick Man, the tribal affiliation of the Spirit Cave mummy could not be determined. An investigation by the Nevada Bureau of Land Management to determine tribal descendants concluded the following: While it is difficult to associate ethnicity or language with archaeological materials, the BLM‘s review of the available evidence indicates sufficient discontinuity such that it is unlikely that the tribes occupying the Spirit Cave area in historic times are from same culture as the people who buried their dead in Spirit Cave in the early Holocene or that they are the direct descendants of that group. Therefore, BLM‘s review of the available evidence indicates that the culture history of the western Great

The Academic Debate 172

Basin shows a pattern of changes in cultural adaptations that does not support cultural continuity over the last 10,000 years. The level of discontinuity is sufficient to warrant the conclusion that the remains from Spirit Cave cannot be reasonably affiliated with any modern tribe or individual.4 The biological data concluded that ―there is no available biological information which clearly supports cultural continuity with contemporary North American Indians.‖5 The evidence clearly shows that the mummy was not related to modern day Native Americas. ―Analysis showed the Spirit Cave cranium closest to ‗Norse‘ and ‗Ainu.‘ It should be noted that the probability for Norse was 0.00084, with Ainu an even lower probability… though they are distinctive from recent American Indian samples, it is also clear that the recent samples most closely resembling these two specimens are Polynesians and Australians, both populations distinguished by their relatively narrow faces, longer crania, and more projecting faces.‖6 Other remains found in Nevada have raised questions as to the tribal affiliation compared to modern day Native Americans. Wizard‘s Beach Man has an 84.45% craniofacial phenotype similar to modern day Native Americans; it also has a 76% probability of being related to typical Polynesians. The rest of the ancient skeletons found in Nevada maintain 88.5% similarity to modern day Australasians (from Australia and Melanesia).7 Similar findings are located North and South America and even as far north as Alaska. 8 Likewise, some skeletal remains are said to be taller than average, and some mummified remains are said to also possess red hair. The search for the oldest skeleton in the Americas still continues. Interestingly enough, other claims presenting ―the oldest‖ skeletons are also seen as ―Caucasian.‖ In December, 2004, in Mexico City, a skull dating back over 13,000 years

The Academic Debate 173

ago was discovered and named ―Peñon Woman III.‖ It was the oldest skull found in the Americas, and again, the similar characteristics of the Ainu people were noticeable, bringing up the theory that perhaps they traveled via the coast.9 In another article by National Geographic from 2008, researchers recovered other ―Caucasian-like‖ remains, this time underwater in a cave off the coast of Yucatán Peninsula. The skeletal remains were dubbed ―Eve of of Naharo,‖ and radiocarbon dating estimated it to be 13,600 years old. Three other skeletons found nearby have been radiocarbon dated as being from between 11,000 to 14,000 years ago. Sea levels were 200 feet lower around the area at the time of their existence which was once a wide open prairie. Dramatic melting of the polar ice caps roughly 8,000 to 9,000 years ago caused the sea levels to rise and flood the caves. Other interesting findings within the caves show the existence of elephants and giant sloths.10 Anthropological testing best suggests relation to the indigenous Ainu found in Japan. Historically, the Ainu can be traced back to the Jōmon period in prehistoric Japanese history, dating as far back as 14,000 BCE. The Ainu are not ―Caucasian,‖ but are tall, hairy, and light-skinned. Initially, researchers thought that a group of people from northern Asia migrated across the Bering Strait during the Ice Age in pursuit of large animals. Researchers now hypothesize that waves of migration occurred not only through the ice-free corridors but also through coastal route migrations. As mentioned previously, recent mitochondrial DNA researchers revealed that 95% of all modern Native American populations can be traced back to six women who lived approximately 18,000 to 21,000 years ago. And what made the results more interesting was that the DNA evidence suggests they did not originate from Asia as previously thought; their DNA signatures aren‘t found in Asia. The DNA concludes that they lived in Beringia, the now underwater land bridge that once existed between Alaska and eastern Serbia. 11 12

The Academic Debate 174

Various anthropologists believe that at one point in time there might have been waves of migration alongside the coastal regions of the Americas. The Coastal Migration Theory is supported by evidence discovered around the Pacific, and the technological and cultural similarities between the Western Americas to those around the Pacific, spanning from Japan down into Australia. Rare isolated pockets of unique mtDNA have been found from North America to South America. The mtDNA of the Chumash Native Americans, which are found in southern California, can be found in isolated prehistoric settlements in Alaska, Mexico, among the Mapuche in southern Chile, and in sites found in Tierra del Fuego/Patagonia.13 Coincidentally, some of the aforementioned areas are where the early Spanish encountered ―white Indians.‖ The level of sophistication of the Chumash raises many ideas regarding their origins. On the Channel Islands which where once inhabited by the Chumash, rare species of flora found nowhere else in the world exist there.14 A study of the some of the islanders reveals skeletal similarities between European races, similar to other rare Native American populations found around California. 15 Following written accounts in the Americas that make mention of a prehistoric, already existing population of ―white people‖ in existence, the question then arises; are these rare populations (such as the Chumash and Mapuche) a part of those ―white people‖ previously mentioned? Or did the original white predecessors assimilate with the arrival of the Native Americans? As previously mentioned, Yurok Native American Lucy Thompson stated that there were originally white predecessors occupying the continent who later mixed with the incoming Native Americans populations.16 Later, the white people ―left this land before the world was cover with water.‖17 And when they left, they left behind the people who were still three-quarters Indian, which is why some of the Yurok are fairskinned.18 Does one simply ignore the ‗myths and lore‘

The Academic Debate 175

presented by Thompson? Or does one investigate deeper to reveal the parallels between the stories that have long since been ignored and the actual evidence? The study of Native American DNA reveals four main haplogroups, those being A, B, C and D.19 Haplogroups are genetic markers that determine the evolutionary pattern found within the Y-Chromosome in mitochondrial DNA (or mtDNA for short). There is a rare X-haplogroup among Native American populations, which is also one of the ten haplogroups found in Europe (at a rate of 3%) and nowhere in East Asia.20 Among Native Americans, haplogroup X appears to be essentially restricted to northern Amerindian groups, including the Ojibwa (~25%), the Nuu-Chah-Nulth (11%–13%), the Sioux (15%), and the Yakima (5%), although we also observed this haplogroup in the NaDene–speaking Navajo (7%).21 The study shows the prehistoric nature of the skeletons being tested, leaving out the possibility of post-Columbian European mixing. The results of the study concluded that there was no relation between the native Nuu-Chah-Nulth (near Vancouver in Canada) who have haplogroup X, with any other Native American populations who also have haplogroup X. In other words, the study showed that there was no normal distribution which would occur if migration took place. The study also concluded that the haplogroup X found in Europe was in fact one of the earliest found among the Americas.22 As the study suggests, could it be that there was already a preexisting group with haplogroup X and after several waves of migration, might be able to account for the haplogroup found among various tribes? If migration from Europe is suspected, then there should be evidence of migration from Europe through eastern Asia and Siberia. However, the uniqueness found within

The Academic Debate 176

various studies shows that haplogroup X only appears in isolation among western Eurasians and Native Americans.23 These findings leave unanswered the question of the geographic source of Native American X2a in the Old World, although our analysis provides new clues about the time of the arrival of haplogroup X in the Americas. Indeed, if we assume that the two complete Native American X sequences (from one Navajo and one Ojibwa) began to diverge while their common ancestor was already in the Americas, we obtain a coalescence time of 18,000 +/- 6,800 YBP [Years Before Present], implying an arrival time not later than 11,000 YBP.24 And yet another study shows that the evidence might actually dismiss the idea of various waves of migration entering the Americas (based on the genetic diversity found among Native Americans). The study determined ―the migration of two founding lineages.‖ Furthermore, the lack of a mutation found among people with haplogroup X, show the resemblance between Native American and European populations.25 Europeans assigned to haplogroup X lack a mutation at np 16213 in the HVSI that all Native Americans exhibit. However, the larger sample size of individuals assigned to haplogroup X in the present study reveals that a substantial number of Native Americans in multiple geographic regions also lack the np 16213G mutation and therefore have haplotypes identical to those of European and Asian members of haplogroup X. The present study raises doubt about interpretations of previously reported evidence for the number of migrations to the Americas… Many researchers have

The Academic Debate 177

interpreted similar estimates among at least four of the five Native American haplogroups as evidence that all haplogroups entered the Americas at the same time. 26 Reanalyzing the evidence may reveal an already preexisting ancient population inhabiting the Americas prior to the arrival of Native Americans. Some research concludes that the population with haplogroup X might have been among the first wave of migration into the New World, but Native American ethnographies dismiss that theory. Many Native American populations believe that they originated from this land, being born unto the earth at their present location. Other Native American stories state that they ventured from a distant homeland later entered into the Americas. It is still unclear, genetically speaking, as to what might have actually taken place. The mystery of haplogroup X is still among the most controversial topics in the study of genetics. Implications of those claims can perpetuate ideas of racism, Eurocentrism, and false justifications over claims to land. In support of Native American mythology regarding a pre-existing ancient population, research shows that the original population with haplogroup X occupied the Americas up to 36,000 years ago, making them among the first people to inhabit the Americas: 27 Time estimates for the arrival of X in North America are 12,000–36,000 years ago, depending on the number of assumed founders, thus supporting the conclusion that the peoples harboring haplogroup X were among the original founders of Native American populations.28 …it is possible that this mtDNA was brought to Beringia/America by the eastward migration of an ancestral Caucasian population, of which no trace has so far been found in the mtDNA gene pool of modern Siberian/eastern Asian populations.29

The Academic Debate 178

And in comparison to Native American stories, Lucy Thompson stated the following: After we left the beautiful valley of Cheek-cheek-alth, for years we wandered down a European land, always moving toward the south, having our origin in the far north. Over this land we wandered having our origin in the far north. Over this land we wandered like exiles, we know not how long, as it might have been centuries until we reached the rolling waves of the ocean. Upon reaching this salt water we made boats or canoes, and paddled over the waves until we reached the opposite shore, having crossed the straits in safety. 30 When The Indians first made their appearance on the Klamath River it was already inhabited by a white race of people known among us as the Wa-gas. These white people were found to inhabit the whole continent, and were a highly moral and civilized race. [And] after a time there were intermarriages between the two races, but these were never promiscuous.31 Hypotheses The Solutrean hypothesis speculates that early Europeans may have once crossed the Atlantic Ocean, bringing with them their technology. This accounts for the technology that predates the Clovis people, who are thought to be the first migrants into the New World. Dennis Stanford, an anthropologist at the Smithsonian Institute, was among the first to support this theory. The early migrations, in the Solutrean hypothesis, suggest that early Europeans in the southwestern area around France and Spain traveled in boats to the New World during the ending of the last Ice Age. The unique hypothesis is based on rare Solutrean projectile points found predating the unique Clovis points. This evidence is also

The Academic Debate 179

supported by the rarity of haplogroup X, as well as the skeletal evidence found (e.g. Kennewick Man).32 There has since been an argument against the Solturean hypothesis as found in an article entitled Ice Age Atlantis? Exploring the Solutrean-Clovis „connection.‘ 33 The article states that researchers Dennis Stanford, along with Bruce Bradley, jump to many conclusions, making false claims with ‗imaginative evidence‘ to support their arguments. Bradley and Stanford later wrote a rebuttal against the article stating that the researchers were unfounded in their arguments and wrong in their interpretations. The evidence argued on both sides is very detailed and scientific. But the final word on the issue was made by Bradley and Stanford: The bottom line is that our technological analyses distinguish two strong clusters, nonbifacial Solutrean Upper Palaeolithic/Beringian (including Alaska) and Solutrean/pre-Clovis/fluted point. This is certainly not conclusive evidence of a connection between Solutrean and pre-Clovis/Clovis, but it does clearly indicate that there are strong similarities, which is not the case with Beringian and pre-Clovis/Clovis. What it comes down to is that all technologies present in pre-Clovis/Clovis are found in Solutrean (except fluting) while most but not all Solutrean technologies are represented in preClovis/Clovis. The same cannot be said for the Siberian/Beringian materials. We ask again: would we have any doubt of the origin of pre-Clovis/Clovis if Solutrean technologies were found in Beringia at the LGM [Last Glacial Maximum]?34 The various hypotheses given by scholars allude to a pre-conceived notion as the main motivation behind their research. Perhaps, a paradigm shift needs to occur before future analysis can be considered. Many researchers once

The Academic Debate 180

believed that the oceans were the true borders of the world, preventing people from moving across them. In recent times, however, the scientific community has accepted many proposed theories regarding the movement of sea-ferrying people. Throughout Polynesia and the Norwegian seas, the evidence created a paradigm shift. Though it was a gradual process of filtering through the false assumptions and preconceived beliefs that people once maintained. As today we have new ideas speculating pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact, a favorite among many pseudoscience proponents, the ideas must invariably be forced to be examined under a different light. Though evidence does support the colonization of the Norse in North America, there is no other evidence to support the idea of other Europeans making their way across the Atlantic Ocean. The Polynesian debate regarding the early establishments in the Americas, on the other hand, is finding more and more support through analysis of various coastal populations (e.g. the Chumash in particular). Proponents of early Polynesian navigators are along the lines of early Coastal Migration theories, and so indeed, it may soon be an established fact. The Mesa Verde site in Chile was the leading reason why previous Clovis-first theories were disproved; however, a new academic paper might prove the theory to be true. The main argument against the Solturean hypothesis is new research based on mtDNA. Results show that there was in fact one single pre-Clovis migration with a coastal route (including haplogroup X). ―Our results strongly support the hypothesis that haplogroup X, together with the other four main mtDNA haplogroups, was part of the gene pool of a single Native American founding population; therefore they do not support models that propose haplogroup-independent migrations, such as the migration from Europe, posed by the Solutrean hypothesis.‖35 The original pre-Clovis people came

The Academic Debate 181

over Beringia and expanded along the Pacific coastline. The results of the research showed the following: Under our model, three periods that may define a date for the peopling of the Americas can be delineated: (1) the colonization of Beringia (because about half of it was ‗‗America‘‘ at that time) by the founding population; (2) the movement out of Beringia— characterized by the fast colonization of the continental Pacific coastal plain—south of the ice sheets; and (3) the more recent and more extensive colonization of inland continental masses. Furthermore, the probability of coalescence of mtDNA lineages within a population and the chance of finding ancient archeological evidence go in opposite directions.36 In this 2008 study, the evidence shows the existence of a wave of migration into the New World. As with any other evidence, it may quickly be disputed and bring into light yet another theory. And so, the hunt for evidence supporting PreSiberian human migrations still continues. Some archaeologists proclaim that researchers are just pushing the migration of the Clovis people further and further back to account for much of the evidence. And the topic itself will remain a much heated debate on both sides, accounting for both evidence and the lack of evidence. The mystery of haplogroup X as well, is still not at an end, in due time certainly new evidence will emerge shedding new perspectives. Case for the White Indians Investigations reveal many accounts of ―white Indians‖ in existence throughout the Americas. Scholars have translated original documents according to their own pre-conceived notions: ―white‖ has often been translated as ―lighter-skinned,‖

The Academic Debate 182

in many cases. The justification for doing so is that the Spaniards were ignorant, regarding their views on other people. Everything not black, through their eyes, was considered white, which was incorrect. Regardless, there might have been several instances where white was substituted for lighterskinned; however, in most of the cases, they were accurately portraying their encounters. Some descriptions mention these white Indians as having beards, while in other descriptions the indigenous state that the other tribes of whites were as white as the Spanish. Documented accounts of white indigenous in the Americas have been researched as far recently as the 1920‘s, but most of the cases have proven false. Several academic news outlets published the ongoing research, including Science News-Letter, later known as Science News. There was a large amount of scientific controversy at the time regarding white Indians found in Darien jungles of Panama, originally discovered by an expedition led by Richard O. Marsh. At first they believed that they might have been a mixed race (between indigenous and European), and later they presumed that they might be a new race. Their skin was described as being similar to that of the northern white Europeans with a rosy tint, while their hair was described as golden.37 Early investigations provided descriptive examples: ―These children have golden hair, hazel or hazel-blue eyes and pink gums.‖38 After the publications became known, various research scientists took interest of the white Indians of Panama. A team of scientists decided to further investigate including Dr. Ales Hrdlicka, anthropologist of the Smithsonian Institution, Dr. Charles B. Davenport of the Station for Experimental Evolution, and Dr. C. W. Stiles of the U. S. Public Health Service. Further investigations revealed that the earliest sighting of these natives could be traced back to 1679 to Alexandre Exquemelin, a buccaneer for both English and French ships. Exquemelin landed on the islands of Zambles,

The Academic Debate 183

located west of the River Darien, where he notes that several of the Indians were ‗fairer than the fairest of Europe‘ with ―hair as light as flax.‖39 After several investigations, anthropologists believed that they may in fact be a new white race, while other anthropologists believed that they were albinos. Later, scientific research established that in fact it was albinism that existed at a very high rate among the Kuna tribe from Panama, a result of inbreeding. However, the Albino children are seen as Moon Children, high leaders among the community.40 Investigations regarding the so-called ―white‖ Native Americans mentioned so frequently before are non-existent today. If tribes of ―white‖ indigenous do exist, they will most likely exist in the unknown regions of the Amazon. After the colonization of the New World, disease and war ran rampant and decimated a majority of the indigenous populations. Though some of the predominant genes are attributed to ―Caucasian-like‖ features that once existed, such as with the case of Kennewick man, phenotypically are no longer predominant, yet alone existent. That is why it is difficult to determine the descendants of these ancient remains. I remain skeptical that any of the ‗white Indians‘ had survived the conquering of various regions by the incoming Europeans. The ‗white Indians‘ lived after the attacks of so many indigenous tribes and prior civilizations. Even if the mysterious ‗white Indians‘ survived all the brutality that took place, they would not be any match for the Europeans. The relocation of tribes, along with the various factors of assimilation and warfare, constituted a great genocide in the Americas, leaving no room for cultural preservation.

The Academic Debate 184


Swedlund, Alan & Anderson, Duane Gordon Creek Woman Meets Kennewick Man: New Interpretations and Protocols Regarding the Peopling of the Americas. American Antiquity. Vol. 64, No. 4 (Oct., 1999), pp. 569-576 2 Orr, Phil C. Arlington Springs Man. Science Magazine. New Series, Vol. 135, No. 3499 (Jan., 1962), p. 219 3 Barker, Pat Ph.D., Ellis, Cynthia M.A., and Damadio, Stephanie Ph.D. July 2006. Determination of Cultural Affiliation of Ancient Human remains from Spirit Cave, Nevada Bureau of Land Management Report Summary (Nevada State Office), p. 1 4 Ibid., p. 6 5 Ibid., p. 7 6 Barker, Pat Ph.D., Ellis, Cynthia M.A., and Damadio, Stephanie Ph.D. July 2006. Determination of Cultural Affiliation of Ancient Human remains from Spirit Cave, Nevada Bureau of Land Management Full Report (Nevada State Office), p. 39 7 Powell, Joseph Frederick The first Americans: race, evolution, and the origin of Native Americans, p. 200 8 List of similar skeletons found in North America: Kennewick Man ~9,500 BP (Washington), Prospect Man ~6,800 BP(Oregon), Arlington Springs Man ~10,000 to 13,000 BP (California), Anzick Burials ~10,800 BP (Montana), Buhl Woman ~10,800 BP (Idaho), Spirit Cave Man~9,400 BP (Nevada), Wizard Beach Man ~9,200 to 9,500 BP (Nevada), Grimes Point Burial Shelter ~9,740 BP (Nevada), Whitewater Draw ~8,000 to 10,000 BP (Arizona), Wilson-Leonard ~ 9,000 to 11,000 BP (Texas), Pelican Rapids Woman ~7,800 BP (Minnesota), Browns Valley Man ~8,900 BP (Minnesota) , Hour Glass Cave ~7,700 to 7,900 BP (Colorado), Nebraska Remains, Gordon Creek ~9,7000 BP (Colorado), and Horn Shelter ~9,600 BP (Texas); taken from the organization ‗Friends of America‘s Past‘ website page, ―Evidence of the Past: A Map and Status of Ancient Remains‖ <> 9 Legon, Jeordan Scientist: Oldest American skull found News 10 Barclay, Eliza Oldest Skeleton in Americas Found in Underwater Cave? National Geographic News September 3, 2008 11 Ritter, Malcolm Native American DNA Links to Six “Founding Mothers” National Geographic News Associated Press March 13, 2008 12 Achilli, A.; et al. The Phylogeny of the Four Pan-American MtDNA Haplogroups: Implications for Evolutionary and Disease Studies PLoS One. 2008 Mar 12;3(3):e1764. ―The phylogenies of haplogroups A2, B2, C1, and D1 reveal a large number of sub-haplogroups but suggest that the

The Academic Debate 185

ancestral Beringian population(s) contributed only six (successful) founder haplotypes to these haplogroups. The derived clades are overall starlike with coalescence times ranging from 18,000 to 21,000 years.‖ This study does not in any way imply that all Native Americans populations can be traced back to only six women; rather, a majority of Native American populations, genetically speaking, may be associated to a founding population. The main criticisms for this study maintain that it does not account for Haplogroup X, and uses a very small sample size to account for a whole population. 13 Raab, L. Mark, Cassidy, Jim, and Yatsko, Andrew California Maritime Archaeology: A San Clemente Island Perspective, pp. 237-8 14 Faber, Phyllis M. California's Wild Gardens: A Guide to Favorite Botanical Sites, p. 152 15 Heizer, R.F. and Whipple, M.A. The California Indians, pp. 100-1 16 Thompson, Lucy To the American Indian: Reminiscences of a Yurok Woman, p. 81 17 Ibid., p. 182 18 Ibid., p. 84 19 Smith DG, Malhi RS, Eshleman J, Lorenz JG, Kaestle FA. Distribution of mtDNA haplogroup X among Native North Americans American Journal of Physical Anthropology Volume 110 Issue 3, pp. 271 - 284 20 Ibid. 21 Brown MD, Hosseini SH, Torroni A, Bandelt HJ, Allen JC, Schurr TG, Scozzari R, Cruciani F, Wallace DC mtDNA Haplogroup X An Ancient Link between EuropeWestern Asia and North America? American Journal of Human Genetics 1998 Dec;63(6):1852-61 22 Smith DG, Malhi RS, Eshleman J, Lorenz JG, Kaestle FA. Distribution of mtDNA haplogroup X among Native North Americans American Journal of Physical Anthropology Volume 110 Issue 3, pp. 271 - 284 23 Reidla, Maere; et al. Origin and Diffusion of mtDNA Haplogroup X American Journal of Human Genetics 2003 November; 73(5): 1178–1190. 24 Ibid. 25 Malhi, RS; et al. The Structure of Diversity within New World Mitochondrial DNA Haplogroups: Implications for the Prehistory of North America American Journal of Human Genetics 2002 Apr;70 (4):905-19. 26 Ibid. 27 Smith DG, Malhi RS, Eshleman J, Lorenz JG, Kaestle FA. Distribution of mtDNA haplogroup X among Native North Americans American Journal of Physical Anthropology Volume 110 Issue 3, pp. 271 - 284 28 Ibid. 29 Ibid.

The Academic Debate 186


Thompson, Lucy To the American Indian: Reminiscences of a Yurok Woman, p. 76 31 Ibid., p.81 32 Oppenheimer, Stephen The Real Eve: Modern Man's Journey Out of Africa, pp. 317-8 33 Straus, Lawrence Guy, Meltzer, David, Goebel, Ted. Ice Age Atlantis? Exploring the Solutrean-Clovis „connection‟ World Archaeology, Volume 37, Number 4, December 2005 , pp. 507-532(26) 34 Bradley, Bruce and Stanford, Dennis The Solutrean-Clovis connection: reply to Straus, Meltzer and Goebel World Archaeology, Volume 38, Issue 4 December 2006 , pp. 704 - 714 35 Fagundes, Nelson J. R.; et al. Mitochondrial Population Genomics Supports a Single Pre-Clovis Origin with a Coastal Route for the Peopling of the Americas The American Journal of Human Genetics, Volume 82, Issue 3, 583-592, 28 February 2008 36 Ibid. 37 Shrubsall, F. C., Haddon, A. C. and Buxton, L. H. Dudley The "White Indians" of Panama Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland Man, Vol. 24, (Nov., 1924), pp. 162-164 38 H. L. Fairchild White Indians of Darien Science, New Series, Vol. 60, No. 1550, (Sep. 12, 1924), pp. 235-237 39 White Indians Seen in Panama in 1679 The Science News-Letter, Vol. 9, No. 274, (Jul. 10, 1926), pp. 9 40 Louis, Regis St. and Doggett, Scott Panama, p. 273

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful